Friday, July 29, 2016

In contemporary societies, if you increase the incomes of single women using establishment methods, single women will spend more money on hedonism and dysgenic breeding. If you decrease the incomes of single women, then you have more children in poverty. If you try to reduce family poverty using establishment methods, victims of establishment dysgenics migrate to white middle class and white working class neighborhoods, ruining far more lives and neighborhoods (the biocultural imperialism of dysgenics and cultural Marxism).

The same goes for many other men and women, with much money wasted on harms and seduction games.

If you give more power to white altruists practicing xenocentrism, they'll commit evils, often the misplaced compassion and misplaced loyalty varieties, until they are back in degraded, low power positions (millions of working class whites paying taxes and voting for establishment candidates, for example). The same results from individuals practicing egoism mixed with xenocentrism (Bob Geldof, Angela Merkel, the Koch brothers, and millions of others).

Societies get ruined for almost everyone.

How do we escape the dysgenic and cultural Marxian traps:

Give a right of secession to all groups and individuals. Add freedom of association rights to constitutions.

Pay Muslims and nonwhites to leave the West.

Fund comprehensive sex and eugenics education.

Spend more on embryo selection, plus genetic engineering research and development.

Federally fund schooling and advertising that demonizes dysgenics the way eugenics has been demonized for the past several generations.

Federally fund sperm banks drawn from high IQ, high character teen boys and young men, charging minimal fees to users. Subsidize egg donation by high IQ, high character young women.

Ban migration to the West by Muslims and nonwhites, then enforce the bans.

Require a sixth month waiting period before marriage.

Create adequate Pigouvian taxes on most negative externalities, including pollution and advertising.

Gradually require white individuals to raise at least three white children to be eligible for Social Security. Use Pigouvian taxes to pay for Social Security. White individuals failing to do so must provide their own retirements or work until disabled.

Ban government funding, including student financial aid, for universities and vocational schools that teach anything other than nursing, medicine, engineering, natural sciences, and vocational skills.

Break off diplomatic relations with any nation that refuses to take their migrants back, parachuting criminal migrants back to their home countries when home countries refuse to take their citizens back.

Eliminate tax entitlements for religions and other charities promoting political agendas, including property tax entitlements.

Punish (severely) employers hiring Muslim and nonwhite migrants.

Enforce surrogate contracts.

Eliminate welfare and affirmative action.

Fund paid maternity or paternity leave in proportion to the number of years worked.

Make public high schools for only the top 25 percent of students. Require the bottom 75 percent of 14 to 19-year-olds to obtain jobs or attend public vocational schools lasting less than two years. Give any teenage student a right to drop out. Permit public schools to expel any student above the age of 12 for any reason without legal interference. Permit K-12 teachers the right to refuse entry into their classrooms any student they think should not be in their classrooms.

Ban public universities from requiring non-major students from taking courses in the so-called humanities and social sciences.

Ban public schools from employing struggle sessions and oaths of loyalty to diversity.

Create party list proportional representation.

Give the stolen electromagnetic spectrum back to the people.

Require publicly funded and corporate created media that travels across public property or uses the electromagnetic spectrum to serve the public interest, not egoism, militarism, and cultural Marxism. Ban ownership of media by non-citizens.

Eliminate citizenship rights for nonwhite and Muslim anchor babies.

Ban government entities from hiring anyone with any degree in the so-called humanities.

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

This election season we've seen much of the words fear, optimism, and demagoguery.

Establishment thinkers label you an optimist if you support militarism, parasitism, and cultural Marxism, if you believe the fallacious statistics manufactured by the establishments, if you call whites dozens of slurs.

If you tell the truth about Islam and nonwhites, you're not considered an optimist. Establishments conflate vapid cheerleading for their own wealth and power with better forms of patriotism. Ad hominem appeals to fear and optimism get treated as more important than the evidence.

The likes of David Brooks, Barack Obama, Thomas Friedman, Andrew Sullivan, and George W. Bush are often respected because they are seen as optimists, no matter the consequences of their actions.

If you have a an anti-establishment idea with beneficial consequences, then you're not considered an optimist.

But there is no good evidence that optimism causes politicians to be good for a country. Tojo, Hitler, Hirohito, Kaiser Wilhelm, and Czar Nicholas II, and thousands of other rulers rank among the most overoptimistic leaders in history. Evidence suggests positive thinking is often a terrible thing.

For over half a century, establishments have acted as if the people don't deserve the truth. Few ideas are are more cynical than that.

The establishments have been fear-mongering and demonizing whites for decades, but when you tell the truth about their crypto totalitarianism, then they accuse you of fear-mongering.

Knowing that nearly all major institutions are controlled by multiculturalists and their allies, you'd thing Obama would pretend to be above the fray. Thousands of academics and mass media individuals are willing to do the demagoguery for Obama.

"when study after study shows [studies hint or suggest, not show] that whites and people of color experience the criminal justice system differently [trite], so that if you’re black you’re more likely to be pulled over or searched or arrested [because blacks are more likely to do crime], more likely to get longer sentences [failure to control for crime severity and other factors], more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime [failure to control for geography and other factors]; when mothers and fathers raise their kids right [false claim] and have “the talk” about how to respond if stopped by a police officer -- “yes, sir,” “no, sir”--but still fear [irrelevant] that something terrible may happen when their child walks out the door, still fear [irrelevant] that kids being stupid [ad hominem] and not quite doing things right might end in tragedy [false claim]--when all this takes place more than 50 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act [irrelevant], we cannot simply turn away and dismiss those in peaceful protest as troublemakers or paranoid [straw person]. (Applause [ad populum].) We can’t simply dismiss it as a symptom of political correctness or reverse racism [straw person]. To have your experience denied like that, dismissed by those in authority [straw person], dismissed perhaps even by your white friends and coworkers and fellow church members again and again and again -- it hurts [straw person]. Surely we can see that, all of us [false claim]."

The triumph of dysgenics over eugenics, especially character dysgenics, represents an ultimate triumph of optimism over reality.

The weary world wonders how much more of this optimism and mass destruction we will be forced to absorb.

Monday, July 25, 2016

We should not support migration to white countries from anywhere, except white refugees from Zimbabwe and South Africa, including other whites moving from one Western country to another, except when engaging in the massively important task of seceding.

Why?

Because contemporary whites moving among white countries tend to be multiculturalists and others bringing harms. Even those less inclined toward globalism, hedonism, and multiculturalism are easily shamed with irrational guilt, thinking that if it is permissible for them, then billions of nonwhites should also have the right to move to the West. "I was an immigrant, too." Nevermind, the massive behavioral differences among immigrant groups.

Yes, white migrants helped make America a decent country, but today's white migrants bring more ideological baggage. Like nonwhites, they tend to view new lands as merely places to make money, having little attachment to the land and people.

There is also the risk of brain drain and a race to the bottom, with some white countries poaching white talent from other white countries, leaving the white country invested in developing that talent worse off.

There is also the rhetorical problem. When multiculturalists concoct fallacious economic stats and small sample fallacies touting the alleged benefits of migration, one of their tricks is to lump all migrants together, touting the benefits of nonwhite immigration by listing migrant white or Jewish inventors and entrepreneurs. I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard someone try to support third world invasions by listing the likes of Andrew Grove as a benefit of invasions.

Whites must view their homelands as a part of themselves that must be reformed. They must not view homelands as disposable wastelands, temporarily useful before escaping someplace else until the day cultural Marxism conquers the entire planet.

The big exception is secession. Ideally, hundreds of new white only countries would exist where individual whites could pick their citizenship, united in a military alliance, but without the horrors of cultural Marxism.

Some individuals wonder why nonmulticulturalists focused so much on Rotherham, not other wrongs in the world.

Maybe because there is little Westerners can do about many other evils in the non-Western world. Or perhaps because multitudes of media types and government officials conspired (yes, conspired) for over a decade to hide the fact that thousands of white children were being held in rape slavery and refused to punish the offenders. Compare that reaction with the onslaught of outrage generated over the fabricated Tawana Brawley and Duke lacrosse cases.

Maybe because past history proves Rotherham is a harbinger of massive evils to come.

Multiculturalism is waging an unconventional war of aggression against whites. Most multiculturalists on this planet support the genocide of whites.

Why should we care when adult "civilians" waging wars of aggression suffer harms from their own despicable choices? We didn't force nonwhites to overpopulate their countries. We didn't force nonwhites to engage in massive amounts of dysgenic breeding. We didn't force them to believe horrific ideologies.

Anyone who believes nonwhites shouldn't be criticized for their choices because they believe humans are controlled by only genes and environments should at least be consistent and not criticize their political opponents, who would also be controlled by only genes and environments.

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

Steve King faced a deluge of criticism for accurately implying that whites invented almost everything worthwhile.

In self-determined, ethnoracially homogenous societies, it wouldn't matter much which race invented what. Which individual and how would matter more.

But it matters now. Nonwhites bombard whites with fallacious race blaming rhetoric, yet when someone semi-famous attempts to counter the fallacies, he gets treated as if he has no moral right to tell the truth.

Tuesday, July 19, 2016

Mass media multiculturalists often announce that ethnoracial fact facers aren't being brave, that fact facers are merely trying to get attention by being contrarian.

But ethnoracial fact facing is the sort of contrarianism that gets you little attention. Few Americans have heard of Thomas Jackson, Gregory Hood, and other realists. Facing facts gets you fired or unhired. You don't get much attention by being permanently banned from the mass media and other institutions. Most Westerners still know almost nothing about ethnoracial issues. (The mountains of fallacious propaganda spread by establishment institutions counts as information, not knowledge.

Ethnoracial fact facers write on obscure websites that barely stay afloat. Most Americans cannot name a single race realist writer. Millions have now heard of the phrase Alternative Right, but they mainly hear straw person attacks from the mass media. The mass media in no way want fact facers to get attention, other than demonizations. There are thousands of influential mass media positions in the world, no open race realist holds any of them.

Despite the protection of being African-American, Walter Williams was fired by NPR merely for stating that he gets nervous seeing "Muslim garb" on a plane. He didn't call Muslims slurs. Dozens of others were fired or unhired for simply facing moral facts. Meanwhile, multiculturalists keep their jobs while getting away with monstrous slurs and murderous rhetoric.

Sally Kohn still has a job at CNN after writing "i have no reason to believe not justified" in regards to Vester Flanagan murdering two colleagues. Among Flanagan's spurious racial complaints were statements by co-workers saying they were going "out in the field."

The mass media do not want certain ethical facts entering the minds of citizens.

But then, the media live in unethical bubbles. The fact that millions of working class whites are being massively harmed by multiculturalists--losing their jobs, lives, incomes, families, schools, neighborhoods, countries--does not occur to multiculturalists as motivation for race realism. Treating nonwealthy whites as full humans with equal rights to others seldom occurs to multiculturalists.

Friday, July 15, 2016

The minimum IQ of competent doctors is at least 115, more than two standard deviations above most black and dark brown groups. The amount of information doctors must know and carefully weigh is staggering. Lower IQ individuals, even when well-meaning, simply don't have a chance of accurately handling that load of information.

And when they screw up, they'll do what they can to evade responsibility and blame you, simply out of their own egoism and tribalism.

Ignore the fatuous praise heaped on them by white multiculturalists. White multiculturalists are vapidly enthralled by things done nonwhite mammals, including stupid pet tricks, drawing their conclusions from faith, indoctrination, and small sample fallacies.

Ignore nonwhite doctors' skills in BS artistry. It doesn't take much brilliance to be a good BS artist. Look at how talented 15-year-olds are in BS artistry.

In the West, dark triad types congregate in law, finance, government, and mass media. In nonwhite countries, those professions pay little, except for individuals at or near the top. Filipino nurses in the U.S. earn many times more than lawyers in the Philippines. Selfish, dark triad individuals in those countries seek out medical professions, hoping to migrate to the West. Academic cheating in nonwhite countries is the norm and nonwhite students who don't cheat quickly learn that not cheating gives their classmates advantages they consider unfair.

You are usually better off with white nurse practitioners than experienced black and dark brown general practitioners.

Despite their advantages over nonwhite medical workers, white medical workers should also be treated with ethical doses of skepticism. Your life and health are too valuable to be ruined by poorly reasoned decisions, especially decisions motivated by the self-loathing rampant among contemporary whites.

Rely on nonwhite medical workers only in emergencies or when whites are unavailable.

Wednesday, July 13, 2016

The political focus of the mass media now is multicultural law enforcement issues.

So let's imagine that beings came down from the heavens to always enforce laws with complete impartiality, a dream of multicultural law enforcement assimilationism. No legal innocent would ever be imprisoned. No suspect would ever be unjustly wounded since police would be replaced by heavenly beings. If someone was fined for driving slightly over the speed limit, everyone driving the same amount over would be fined the same amount. Would that then make multiculturalism a good thing?

Then there are the massive harms from illegal activities that the heavenly beings would punish equally, but fail to prevent: fraud, espionage, illegal bribery, interracial violent crime, to name a few. Preventing harms is far more important than punishing them afterward.

Multiculturalists legalize harmful activities that should be illegal and also ban beneficial actions by whites and other ostracized groups.

Multiculturalists, despite what they say, don't pursue impartiality. They pursue egoism, conquest, and the annihilation of whites and other perceived opponents. Doing so gives their lives emotive purpose. Get justice, get less peace. They take your country, then they treat you as an enemy of the state for not slavishly supporting they dystopian empire they create, acting as if patriotism means selflessly aiding free riding. When we treat persons of psychological or evolutionary egoism fairly or equally, they will still view the treatments as unfair or unequal, They view whatever they want to believe as fairness. Wealthy Persian Gulf persons, who never worked a day in their lives, nevertheless view themselves as victims of Westerners.

Massive genetic differences related to behavior make differing races incompatible, except when using totalitarian force to keep the temporary peace.

You get more of what you reward. And today's rewards are out of whack and unsustainable.

The main ideological result of assimilation has been assimilating whites into totalitarian, anti-white beliefs systems.

Leave us alone to go our own ways. We are not the property of multiculturalists. Millions of future generations depend our actions.

Saturday, July 9, 2016

For years, multiculturalists have been hammering Hillary Clinton's "super predators" comment and other allegedly tough on crime and welfare comments she made in the 1990s.

It is not enough that Clinton supports open borders and a multitude of other lesser multicultural initiatives. Even slight deviations from cultural Marxism are no longer tolerated among multiculturalists.

So Clinton's recent Dallas comments are no surprise. Her rhetoric is now utterly tamed by cultural Marxism. Almost every rotten behavior by nonwhites can now be grist to excoriate whites. Whites are assumed to be a blamable cause of almost everything harmful done by nonwhites.

For Democrats, almost no rhetorical point for even slight ethnoracial fact facing now exists. Slight dog whistling will no longer get them additional votes and donations from whites.

Almost no race realist will vote for her, period.

White, third way multiculturalists are now so well indoctrinated that they see nothing amiss with whites being blamed for nonwhite actions in Dallas, Orlando, and more importantly, J Street and Wall Street. She can say almost anything negative about whites and still get votes and money from white, third way multiculturalists.

Unfortunately, for nonwealthy domestic multiculturalists and most of us, Clinton's major policy prescriptions support dysgenics, militarism, financialism, and open borders. She's devoted to Haim Saban and George Soros. (Ignore the gold buggism following that latter article.)

The anarcho-tyranny joke's on the nonwealthy domestic multiculturalists and us. African-Americans may get Clinton to be soft on crime, but they'll be many of the crime victims. They may get a little more affirmative action and Section 8 housing, but they'll keep getting reduced wages from chaos, dysgenics, globalism, militarism, and financialism--as will we.

Friday, July 8, 2016

I once worked with a very, very smart white supporter of Marxism, especially regarding Marxism south of the Rio Grande. If you asked him to improvise a 10,000 word soliloquy about Zapatistas, he could probably do so.

He would buttonhole coworkers into conversions about Latin American politics, talking to coworkers as if they were four-year-olds, fuming about their ignorance of Latin American politics and how much blame Americans allegedly deserve for failings south of our border.

Though he would have been a good candidate for a Latin American Jeopardy contest, if you asked my coworker what the phenotype IQs of various Latin American countries were, he might have said, "One-hundred. Like everywhere else." Or maybe, "What's a phenotype?" Asking him about dysgenics or free rider problems would have been even more of an adventure. Asking him how many coups Latin America had before Washington starting seriously messing around in Latin America would have been another interesting topic.

My coworker was smart, not wise.

Since then I have met many other progressive white guys, who act as if their banal historical knowledge of Latin America makes them political prescription experts. They read their Chomsky. The US government did something wrong, therefore they prescribe prescriptions that have been unrelentingly disastrous, as if US government actions justify their own evils. I met one guy who illegally traveled to Cuba and marvelled about Cuba, the Cuba untainted by excesses of consumerism and turbocapitalism.

Once my coworker bragged about how America would become like Brazil and have lots of beautiful women like Brazil. I told him American women were more attractive to me than Brazilian women, and that Brazil was the world capital for women who unintentionally look like drag queens.

Tuesday, July 5, 2016

In a totalitarian societies, including the former United States, there is no such thing as a legitimate authority.

There are only experts and non-experts.

It is often logical to criticize the circumstances of an alleged expert, especially when they fail to provide well-reasoned arguments for their positions. In other words, circumstantial ad hominem attacks are often relevant when judging the expertise of experts. An expert witness should face circumstantial ad hominem attacks if he has been previously convicted of fraud or for various other character traits.

It is logically legitimate to criticize the expertise of Judge Gonzalo Curiel, a member of the La Raza Lawyers Association, though Donald Trump did so in a poorly reasoned manner, regardless whether Trump University was a scam, which it was.

Those who support Hispanic supremacism have no business living in the same country as white non-Hispanics and have no business deciding court cases involving white non-Hispanics.

Judges in the former United States are not democratically elected by individuals having self-determination. They are merely experts at best.

Not surprisingly, those who support establishment totalitarianism jumped to the defense of Curiel, the same thinkers who bombard whites with irrelevant circumstantial and abusive ad hominem attacks suddenly imagined that the circumstances of their alleged expert are irrelevant and any criticism of Curiel "racist."

(The ability to experience cognitive dissonance is seldom learned in law schools or journalism schools.)

I discern five ways in which the phrase naturalistic fallacy is thrown around, often without being defined and often in a pseudo profound manner:

The origins fallacy, also known as the genetic fallacy, a type of irrelevance: This is a legitimate fallacy type but calling it the naturalistic fallacy sows confusion. Six examples of the origins fallacy: X is artificial. X is unnatural. Y is natural. Americans have not believed X for years. Y is the American way. X comes from the word for W.

The idea that you cannot find the truth value of most prescriptive claims (ethical and other value claims) with 100 percent accuracy using formal or informal logic or any other method. Big deal. Some value claim conclusions are 58 percent likely to be true, others 99.9999 percent likely, others somewhere else between zero and 100 percent likely. Whether a prescriptive conclusion is 99.9999 percent likely to be true or 100 percent likely should have little affect on our willingness to act based on expected values and other moral arguments. You should avoid being eaten by flesh eating bacteria, no matter whether a tiny probability exists that flesh eating bacteria might be good. The truth value of most real world empirical claims (is claims) cannot be found with 100 percent accuracy either.

The fact-value rubbish: the assertion that empirical claims can be facts while value claims cannot. In other words, the idea that the moon is made of cheese is somehow capable of becoming a fact, even though it isn't a fact, simply because it is an empirical claim. But "You shouldn't walk in front of that bus," is incapable of being a fact because it is a value claim. Facts are any claims that have good arguments supporting them, whether value claims or empirical claims. In other words, facts have a high probability of being accurate because they have sufficient evidence supporting them.

The belief that a value claim conclusion requires a value claim premise. More rubbish. For example, "Don't eat that box of poison. Doing so has a 99.92 percent likelihood of killing you," contains a value claim conclusion followed an empirical claim premise. It doesn't need a value claim premise.

The assertion that value claims are worthless or meaningless. Self-contradictory rubbish. If value claims are worthless or meaningless, then the claim "value claims are worthless or meaningless" is not worth anything or does not mean anything.

We should not help whites "to preserve our race," because that is a genetic fallacy. We should do so to make our race better. We should do so to prevent the mass destruction that cultural Marxism brings, especially the increasing mass destruction the young and future generations will face. We should want our children to have better genes and environments than ourselves. We should want to reach their ethical potentials.

And by better, I don't mean more exciting toys. Children of wealthy, high achievers often turn out bad, despite high investments by their parents because these children have worse environments than their parents. Consumer items consumed their children. Their peers, in prestigious schools, devote themselves to hedonism and other bad causes, which these children dutifully follow. These kids never develop chips on their shoulders to find ethical facts and fight for them. Instead, they believe what makes them feel good, and hating nonwealthy whites makes them feel real good about themselves. (For most humans, hate is a feel-good emotion. Wealthy whites, apparently, almost never feel any cognitive dissonance for hating nonwealthy white over spurious reasons.)

Governments have no right to use totalitarian force to require individuals to live among rent seeking and destruction seeking ethnoracial outgroups.

Being forced to live surrounded by hostile outgroups is odious and degrading, worse than being forced to live surrounded by nihilism practicing 15-year-olds. Would it be acceptable for the government to force us to live surrounded by nihilism practicing 15-year-olds for the remainder of our lives?

Friday, July 1, 2016

Another example of wrong versus wronger: the current curriculum education standards groups versus the poverty is the most important cause of poor educational outcomes groups.

Big deal if a few studies find super teachers make a big difference. Maybe the studies are rigged. Maybe the effects are not long lasting. A few thousand super teachers exist while thousands of times that many students exist.

Sure, we could practice eugenics, including cloning the super teachers, but the current establishments are fanatically opposed to eugenics--and are getting more dysgenic every day.

Today's students are too low IQ, ethnoracially diverse, and enveloped in cultures of hostility.

And much of the hostility comes from the fact that the curriculum, beyond basic reading and math, is filled with garbage that has no practical or ethical value, not to mention the cultural Marxism. I once knew a high school auto mechanics teacher. He found multitudes of decent jobs for his medium IQ students. He was a job creator. So what happened? The school district decided to replace the auto mechanics classes with vague, vapid technology classes--the sort of classes where you make worthless objects out of Popsicle sticks--on the unsupported opinion that doing so makes students more creative, confident, and well-rounded.